In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status: 


	Rex Ballard - Director of Electronic Distribution
	http://cnj.digex.net/~rballard

On Tue, 12 Mar 1996, fathers wrote:
> From: Paul Brunner 
> > From: R.L. Cheney Jr. 
> > Dear Ranman,
> > 
> > Arrest the woman on a criminal pregnancy charge (if you are indeed the
> > father).  And also charge her with THEFT.
> > 
> > Make the charge that she was a sperm thief.  (When they ask you how she got
> > the sperm, TAKE THE FIFTH AND DO NOT ANSWER.)  But continue to attest that
> > your sperm was stolen without your knowledge and ILLEGALLY under fraud.

Interesing point here.  Children concieved during wedlock are conceived 
under a promise "to love and charish.....til death do us part".   If she 
violated any of those vows, she would be conceiving the children under 
fraudulent circumstances.  In other words, the minute she files for 
divorce, she now has to prove that you voluntarily agreed to be 
responsible for the children EVEN in the event of a divorce (did you sign 
a paper?).

If she prevented you from seeing the children - even once, before getting 
the restraining order, that's kidnapping.  If she filed the restraining 
order under circumstances other than you being hauled off to jail for 
assaulting you in front of the officers, that's pergury.  What would 
happen if you pressed criminal charges.

If she takes even one dime from another man while having sex with him, 
that's prostitution.  More criminal charges.  In addition, she becomes 
classified as a "sex-offender" if convicted.

If, after filing criminal complaints with the district attorneys office,
you were to file for custody based on that she is "under investigation",
would that influence the judge a bit?

> > (The facts of the case will prove this -- unless you knew you did this and
> > moved from place to place and hid from her and Government.  If you haven't
> > done that...you'll win.)  Rest your case on the facts and give them NO
> > INFORMATION NO MATTER HOW HARD THEY TRY TO INTIMIDATE YOU.  (They'll go
> > ballistic over this technique.)

There is something very intimidating about sitting in a locked cell with 
a guy who looks like Mr. T and thinks your "cute".  There's something 
intimidating about being unable to work because social services puts a 
garnish on your wages (telling your employer that you are irresponsible).

> > Burden of proof is on them when you do this, and the FACTS are WAY, WAY on
> > your side.  If you get a jury there, we feel they'll rule in your favour.

If a jury heard the circumstances and charges of most "I want more or you 
go to jail" cases, they would probably lock up the wife for purgery, 
child abuse, and cruelty.  Just get a mixed jury - 6 men, 6 women.

> > Just use the evidence of the case.  Child born 10 years ago, without YOU
> > ever being contacted or having ANY knowledge of the fact.  Also, show TAX
> > returns showing your SINGLE filing status over those same years.

Subpena her tax returns.  Also her marital history, previous leases on 
apartments, and major purchases.  If any of them are JOINT, you have 
prove that she didn't want to contact you.  Just prove that even ONE 
other man lived with her during that 10 years.

> > (Also countersue for damages against her.)

Have her prosecuted for prostitution, extortion, blackmail, and purgery.

> > Keep us informed as to what goes on here.
> > 

From rballard@cnj.digex.net Wed Mar 13 22:29:32 1996